Charles Page | PentecostalTheology.com
For several years I have been striving to understand Anabaptist’s views. Theological they reject anything Roman Catholic and particularly Baptismal regeneration. Anyone desiring to join an anabaptist Church have to be re-baptized. Do they reject decisional regeneration?
Anyone know about this?
John Kissinger [01/27/2016 5:53 PM]
do you mean free will in regeneration or free will in general?
John Conger [01/27/2016 5:57 PM]
My in laws are independent Baptist and to join their church I would have to get rebaptized even though I was baptized as an adult
Roger David [01/27/2016 6:57 PM]
Anabaptists hold to decisional regeneration and require baptism as a step of obedience.
John Conger [01/27/2016 7:29 PM]
Interesting . The same preacher get did say that they originated w John the Baptist. And he was serious
Charles Page [01/27/2016 7:31 PM]
The Primitive Baptist strongly insist that they originated with John the Baptist. They say they are anabaptist.
Curtis Fenison [01/27/2016 7:51 PM]
It is a Anachronistic fallacy the baptist Claim. Its has been proven to be a grossly dishonest Shameful Claim. Yet in a twist of irony no wonder they do not have the Baptism of the Holy Ghost.
Charles Page [01/27/2016 8:10 PM]
They believe in the baptism of the Holy ghost/regeneration but not the baptism WITH the Holy Ghost.
I agree with you about the ‘chronological’ claim to John the Baptist – there are large gaps in their chain.
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 12:42 AM]
I was raised landmark baptist. We ran the fellowship printing house for the landmark Baptist. Even southern, american, general, regular, ana, and most independent baptist baptism was not accepted. There was a strict compliance of only accepting baptism from other Baptist that held to the strict standard. One mega landmark Baptist church started accepting southern baptism baptism. The rest of the landmark churches started rebaptizing all transfers from that church. Landmark Water Baptism is argued as a fulfillment of being baptised into the Holy Spirit baptized church. And a person is not individually baptised in the holy ghost. Because that happened only once on the day of pentecost. And the church was the object of that event and was the single only event of the baptism of the holy ghost. So a person is only water baptised into the church which was only once baptised in the Holy Ghost on that day of pentecost which could only be a baptist church. A person cannot be baptised in the Holy Ghost. It’s gets real illogical fallacious and infantile in interpetation from there.
John Kissinger [01/28/2016 8:07 AM]
so what church are you member of now Curtis
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 8:46 AM]
I am ordained COGP. But we are more AG. We oversee home church groups. Our circle includes Fire School Ministry. Dr Brown. Fire International. My baptist Brethren and Dad still think Baptism of the Holy Ghost and speaking tongues and words of knowledge is of the Devil. Early in my ministry, in my birth town, we had several supernatural events in a three county wide area of Washington which ended in a public newspaper and radio debate between baptist and non-pentecostals vs Pentecostals whether I was a psychic and a false prophet or Prophet. So I went from a good obedient but self righteous baptist home boy to a Holy Ghost filled table turning lunatic. LoL
John Kissinger [01/28/2016 11:32 AM]
Charles Page has discussed some connection of landmarkism with CoG/CoGoP roots before ” There are Baptist Churches that exclude from their own membership all drunkards, theater-goers, dancers, horse-racers, and visitors of the race-course, because they cannot fellowship such practices as Godly walking or becoming a Christian, and therefore believe that they are commanded to purge the feast of all such characters as leaven, and, yet, by the invitation to the members of all other Baptist Churches, they receive the very same characters to their table every time they spread it.” http://www.reformedreader.org/history/graves/ol/ch09.htm
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 1:55 PM]
Yep. And we held exclusion for drunkards and public drinking as the Lord’s supper was only valid if it was wine because grape juice or so called ambiguous reference of new wine represents the defiled blood of man and wine the purified blood of christ. It was believed that the wine at Lord’s supper taken unworthy could expose a sin. And grape juice used for the Lord’s supper was rendered the Lord’s supper as a non disciplinary power.
John Conger [01/28/2016 2:05 PM]
I heard a very compelling Argument against using wine during communion because the fermentation was a symbol of sin and it could not also represent the blood of Jesus also. As a COG minister I used to tow the line on most all the ideology. But after I left I really started examining whether my beliefs lined up w scripture or if I was trying scripture line up w my beliefs. That was when I came to accept having one drink wasn’t sin.
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 2:12 PM]
Visitors from other like churches even visting missionaries and guest preacher could not participate in the local churches Lord supper.
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 2:13 PM]
If you did wear head covering you were in disobedience and could not participate in the supper.
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 2:24 PM]
All these rules were explained as nessesary to keep the feast pure and that has a sort of logical conclusion. That being that a member from some other like standing church is not intimately known and a resulting sickness from unworthiness could not be easily dealt with without creating an accusation envolving another local body and all it’s members.
Ricky Grimsley [01/28/2016 4:41 PM]
I knew Anna the Baptist. Will that help?
John Kissinger [01/28/2016 5:57 PM]
Curtis This is characteristic of many enclosed communities. Not just Anabaptist. What really makes them different then others?
Curtis Fenison [01/28/2016 7:07 PM]
What do you think makes them different then others? Its mostly comparing citrus fruits to citrus fruits. Assuming they are preaching the Gospel the dividing line is mostly traditions. The question is Can they effectively evangelize. 2. Is the Candle stick of the Holy Spirit still working in their midst. Has their dogma and traditions quenched the Spirit of freedom. Paul said I will be unto a Greek a Greek that I may win some.
John Kissinger [01/29/2016 6:06 PM]
Curtis Fenison I was saved (grew up) in a very conservative church as well. Up to the point of not shaking hands with sinners (this one being the least). So re-reading Called & Empowered this week found out an essay by C. Peter Wagner of NAR-3rd wave. Contrary to my expectations in a conference around 1988 and then this essay in 1999, the guy pin points exactly what is fixing to happen in Pentecostal missions – and today seems he was right. One of the things he mentioned is that focus on power evangelism among Pentecostals came from namely their close communities and very strict doctrine. Having that, Pentecostals were eager to get every one saved not believing in post-Trib church, purgatory, universalism or any second chances after the Rapture. Now this is C Peter Wagner who in the same essay says he is not Pentecostal and is strong kingdom-now post-mil. But admits that the closeness of Pentecostal churches was the reason for their church growth and world mission outreaches. I find this very controversial and if there’s more interest in it could post the actual text for discussion.
John Kissinger [01/30/2016 8:06 AM]
Curtis Fenison I grew up in a very conservative church to the point of not shaking hands with sinners (this being the least). So re-reading Called & Empowered this week found out an essay by C. Peter Wagner of NAR-3rd wave. Contrary to my expectations in a conference around 1988 and then this essay in 1999, the guy pin points exactly what is fixing to happen in Pentecostal missions – and today seems he was right. One of the things he mentioned is that focus on power evangelism among Pentecostals came from namely their close communities and very strict doctrine. Having that, Pentecostals were eager to get every one saved not believing in post-Trib church, purgatory, universalism or any second chances after the Rapture. Now this is C Peter Wagner who in the same essay says he is not Pentecostal and is strong kingdom-now post-mil. But admits that the closeness of Pentecostal churches was the reason for their church growth and world mission outreaches. I find this very controversial and if there’s more interest in it could post the actual text for discussion.